Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30564650›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2017

The specific needs of patients following sepsis: a nested qualitative interview study.

Sabine Gehrke-Beck, Mareike Bänfer, Nina Schilling, Konrad Schmidt, Jochen Gensichen, Christoph Heintze

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sabine Gehrke-BeckGP, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Berlin, Germany.
Mareike BänferPhysician, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Berlin, Germany.
Nina SchillingMedical Student, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Berlin, Germany.
Konrad SchmidtGP, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena, Germany.
Jochen GensichenGP and Professor, Institute of General Practice, Medical Center of the University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Christoph HeintzeGP and Professor, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurvivors of sepsis suffer from multiple critical disease sequelae when discharged to primary care. There is a lack of structured aftercare programmes and case managers may be helpful in caring for patients with chronic critical disease.

aimTo gain insight into the functioning of a structured aftercare programme for post-sepsis patients in general practice. DESIGN &

settingA qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with patients and GPs across Germany who participated in an randomised controlled trial of a structured aftercare programme for post-sepsis patients, which included patient education and case manager monitoring.

methodQualitative interviews with 19 patients and 13 GPs were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using qualitative content analysis.

resultsPatients appreciated the information given in the patient education session, but some disliked it because it reminded them of their serious illness. GPs appreciated patient education because well-informed patients are more likely to participate in follow-up. Patients appreciated the case monitoring because it made them feel safer and more cared for and helped them reflect on their health issues. However, some patients felt uncomfortable with the regular questioning. GPs appreciated the case management programme because they received regular clinical information. However some GPs were wary of the clinical relevance of the information, the delegation of the patient to the nurse, and efficiency of time. Both patients and GPs requested more clinical support, such as easier access to psychotherapists.

conclusionIn general, both patients and their GPs appreciated patient education and monitoring following sepsis. Patients' retrospections and worries about their serious illness need to be considered.

Indexed as

aftercarepatient education as topicprimary health careprofessional delegationqualitative researchsepsis

Identifiers

PMID30564650
PMCPMC6172671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.